This school is a nightmare. A complete nightmare. I am a 1L and I took 10k out for the first semester. The professors do not have your personal interest in mind, they dont care if you pass or fail. the grading is blind, and in legal writing the grading is VERY subjective. I am currently failing my first semester and I have been studying just about everyday. Busting my butt. I have no idea why some idiots are passing with flying colors and I am failing. Its a mystery to me. This place is indeed cut throat. this place robs you of your money. and EVERYONE and their mother gets a scholarship. the odds of keeping it are 0 to none. the standard is so high. 3.0? you kidding? that's like asking for a 100% on a test here. They let 700 students into my 2014 class this semester. These are the facts. This is the truth. This place should lose their accreditation. This place is a nightmare. It has made me lose my sanity. Topping? I just got this student body email from one of the dean's.

As you may have seen or read in the news recently, the United States Department of Education (DOE) has proposed new regulations impacting for-profit higher education. The proposed rules, popularly referred to as the Gainful Employment Regulations, were issued in July. The regulations would implement provisions of the Higher Education Act which require proprietary schools whose students have access to federal student loans to ensure that their graduates are adequately prepared for gainful employment. They are intended to target documented abuses by some for-profit career colleges and undergraduate schools with regard to student recruitment and deficiencies in program quality. The range of penalties for noncompliance run from placing additional disclosures about education debt on communications with students to the loss of access to federal student loans for the institution.

I assure you this regulatory package was not drafted with Coastal Law in mind. Nor has it been proposed in response to any professional program offered by any other proprietary law or medical school. Even though Coastal Law is not the target of these proposed regulations, should they ultimately be imposed upon us, we anticipate being able to comply and students will not lose any access to federal funds.

Essentially, the proposed regulations would use loan repayment rates and debt-to-income ratios to determine whether a for-profit school qualifies for federal financial aid. Schools that met the regulations' minimum standards for debt to income ratio and active repayment of loans would continue to be eligible to receive federal funds. Partial compliance would allow schools to continue to receive funding on a restricted basis. Those that fell below the established threshold would not qualify.

Certainly, while the goal of protecting students from these abuses is commendable, the DOE has produced no evidence to demonstrate any such abuses exist at proprietary law or medical schools. Moreover, the DOE has acknowledged it does not have relevant data on graduate and professional programs. Because the proposed regulation is overbroad, Coastal Law, InfiLaw, and other proprietary law schools have been working with the DOE, legislators and other influencers in Washington to communicate why we are different and why this rule change should not be applied to us.

As an example, and by way of explanation, a primary flaw in the proposal is the repayment formula it would establish. The provision would apply a 10-year repayment standard for all for-profit schools - vocational, professional or otherwise. In failing to distinguish between these very different types of schools, the DOE does not acknowledge key differences in the students, degree conferred and professional career path of these graduates. As you know, law students generally refinance their loans into 30-year repayment periods.

To put it into perspective, very few of our not-for-profit private law school counterparts – which the DOE does not make subject to the regulation – would be in compliance with the proposed rule. If applied across the board to the 119 private non-profit law schools across the country, only 8 would meet the test. The remaining 111, or 93%, would fail, including Harvard, Duke and Wake Forest. Over half of the non-profit medical schools in the country would fail if they were subject to the regulation.

The fact is, our graduates have demonstrated they are prepared for gainful employment in that their current loan default rate is a mere 1.7%, as compared to 5% for public school graduates and nearly 18% by schools in the for-profit sector. We anticipate that the DOE will be attentive to these and other compelling arguments made on our behalf.

It has also come to my attention that some students have raised concerns that this development has or will jeopardize our ABA accreditation. It absolutely has not.

In fact, we have advocated to the DOE that it is the ABA’s rigorous accreditation standards that preclude the types of abuses that have generated regulatory concern. These standards govern all aspects of a law school’s programs and policies, including:

To retain accreditation, a law school must submit annual reports every October. And, every school is subjected to a thorough evaluation, including a Site Visit by a team of legal education experts, every seven years. Along with others in our organization, I have extensive experience as an ABA Site Evaluator and can state that Coastal Law is doing an outstanding job relative to the ABA Accreditation Standards.

We will keep you informed regarding the proposed regulations in the coming weeks. There was a 45 day comment period ending in early September after which the regulations were to go in to effect in November. However, because of the tens of thousands of public comments received and congressional bipartisan opposition to the regulations, final regulations are now not expected until early 2011.

Very shortly you will receive an invitation to an open forum which will touch on this topic and others of interests to the student body. As future lawyers, I encourage you to review the proposed regulations found at 75 Federal Register 43616, evaluate them in light of the facts I have presented, and to feel free to discuss any concerns with me or any administrator or faculty member. I have attached to this email the Comment Letter submitted by InfiLaw to the Department of Education which articulates in detail our position on the regulations.

This is our future as law students and lawyers. I can't believe the quality of attorneys that will come out of this school. It definitely won't be me. I will probably fail out of this first semester. The ones that will stay will be the teacher's pets, slimeballs, and lottery winners.

frescodecacao wrote:This school is a nightmare. A complete nightmare. I am a 1L and I took 10k out for the first semester. The professors do not have your personal interest in mind, they dont care if you pass or fail. the grading is blind, and in legal writing the grading is VERY subjective. I am currently failing my first semester and I have been studying just about everyday. Busting my butt. I have no idea why some idiots are passing with flying colors and I am failing. Its a mystery to me. This place is indeed cut throat. this place robs you of your money. and EVERYONE and their mother gets a scholarship. the odds of keeping it are 0 to none. the standard is so high. 3.0? you kidding? that's like asking for a 100% on a test here. They let 700 students into my 2014 class this semester. These are the facts. This is the truth. This place should lose their accreditation. This place is a nightmare. It has made me lose my sanity. Topping? I just got this student body email from one of the dean's.

As you may have seen or read in the news recently, the United States Department of Education (DOE) has proposed new regulations impacting for-profit higher education. The proposed rules, popularly referred to as the Gainful Employment Regulations, were issued in July. The regulations would implement provisions of the Higher Education Act which require proprietary schools whose students have access to federal student loans to ensure that their graduates are adequately prepared for gainful employment. They are intended to target documented abuses by some for-profit career colleges and undergraduate schools with regard to student recruitment and deficiencies in program quality. The range of penalties for noncompliance run from placing additional disclosures about education debt on communications with students to the loss of access to federal student loans for the institution.

I assure you this regulatory package was not drafted with Coastal Law in mind. Nor has it been proposed in response to any professional program offered by any other proprietary law or medical school. Even though Coastal Law is not the target of these proposed regulations, should they ultimately be imposed upon us, we anticipate being able to comply and students will not lose any access to federal funds.

Essentially, the proposed regulations would use loan repayment rates and debt-to-income ratios to determine whether a for-profit school qualifies for federal financial aid. Schools that met the regulations' minimum standards for debt to income ratio and active repayment of loans would continue to be eligible to receive federal funds. Partial compliance would allow schools to continue to receive funding on a restricted basis. Those that fell below the established threshold would not qualify.

Certainly, while the goal of protecting students from these abuses is commendable, the DOE has produced no evidence to demonstrate any such abuses exist at proprietary law or medical schools. Moreover, the DOE has acknowledged it does not have relevant data on graduate and professional programs. Because the proposed regulation is overbroad, Coastal Law, InfiLaw, and other proprietary law schools have been working with the DOE, legislators and other influencers in Washington to communicate why we are different and why this rule change should not be applied to us.

As an example, and by way of explanation, a primary flaw in the proposal is the repayment formula it would establish. The provision would apply a 10-year repayment standard for all for-profit schools - vocational, professional or otherwise. In failing to distinguish between these very different types of schools, the DOE does not acknowledge key differences in the students, degree conferred and professional career path of these graduates. As you know, law students generally refinance their loans into 30-year repayment periods.

To put it into perspective, very few of our not-for-profit private law school counterparts – which the DOE does not make subject to the regulation – would be in compliance with the proposed rule. If applied across the board to the 119 private non-profit law schools across the country, only 8 would meet the test. The remaining 111, or 93%, would fail, including Harvard, Duke and Wake Forest. Over half of the non-profit medical schools in the country would fail if they were subject to the regulation.

The fact is, our graduates have demonstrated they are prepared for gainful employment in that their current loan default rate is a mere 1.7%, as compared to 5% for public school graduates and nearly 18% by schools in the for-profit sector. We anticipate that the DOE will be attentive to these and other compelling arguments made on our behalf.

It has also come to my attention that some students have raised concerns that this development has or will jeopardize our ABA accreditation. It absolutely has not.

In fact, we have advocated to the DOE that it is the ABA’s rigorous accreditation standards that preclude the types of abuses that have generated regulatory concern. These standards govern all aspects of a law school’s programs and policies, including:

To retain accreditation, a law school must submit annual reports every October. And, every school is subjected to a thorough evaluation, including a Site Visit by a team of legal education experts, every seven years. Along with others in our organization, I have extensive experience as an ABA Site Evaluator and can state that Coastal Law is doing an outstanding job relative to the ABA Accreditation Standards.

We will keep you informed regarding the proposed regulations in the coming weeks. There was a 45 day comment period ending in early September after which the regulations were to go in to effect in November. However, because of the tens of thousands of public comments received and congressional bipartisan opposition to the regulations, final regulations are now not expected until early 2011.

Very shortly you will receive an invitation to an open forum which will touch on this topic and others of interests to the student body. As future lawyers, I encourage you to review the proposed regulations found at 75 Federal Register 43616, evaluate them in light of the facts I have presented, and to feel free to discuss any concerns with me or any administrator or faculty member. I have attached to this email the Comment Letter submitted by InfiLaw to the Department of Education which articulates in detail our position on the regulations.

This is our future as law students and lawyers. I can't believe the quality of attorneys that will come out of this school. It definitely won't be me. I will probably fail out of this first semester. The ones that will stay will be the teacher's pets, slimeballs, and lottery winners.

If this is true(aka not flame), you should forward that letter to above the law ASAP. Exposure is the key and it looks like this is essentially an admission by Coastal that their graduates cannot get jobs.

I know FL Coastal is essentially a joke, but I do know a girl who graduated from there a few years ago who has a pretty good job. Her legal assistant/paralegal is a graduate from UF who never bassed the bar. Crazy things do happen haha.

Granted Florida Coastal isn't T14, but they were fully accredited within five years of opening. It's beenmy observation that their graduates DO find jobs and some with BIG LAW. It's not a bad school all in all.

texaslawyer wrote:Granted Florida Coastal isn't T14, but they were fully accredited within five years of opening. It's beenmy observation that their graduates DO find jobs and some with BIG LAW. It's not a bad school all in all.

texaslawyer wrote:Granted Florida Coastal isn't T14, but they were fully accredited within five years of opening. It's beenmy observation that their graduates DO find jobs and some with BIG LAW. It's not a bad school all in all.

texaslawyer wrote:Granted Florida Coastal isn't T14, but they were fully accredited within five years of opening. It's beenmy observation that their graduates DO find jobs and some with BIG LAW. It's not a bad school all in all.

False

That's up to the graduate as to how employable they are !

No.It.Isn't.

Either you are trolling for the luz or you have no f'ing idea what you're talking about. The first I can respect, the second and you need to GTFO.

texaslawyer wrote:Granted Florida Coastal isn't T14, but they were fully accredited within five years of opening. It's beenmy observation that their graduates DO find jobs and some with BIG LAW. It's not a bad school all in all.

texaslawyer wrote:Granted Florida Coastal isn't T14, but they were fully accredited within five years of opening. It's beenmy observation that their graduates DO find jobs and some with BIG LAW. It's not a bad school all in all.

texaslawyer wrote:Granted Florida Coastal isn't T14, but they were fully accredited within five years of opening. It's beenmy observation that their graduates DO find jobs and some with BIG LAW. It's not a bad school all in all.

False

That's up to the graduate as to how employable they are !

No.It.Isn't.

Either you are trolling for the luz or you have no f'ing idea what you're talking about. The first I can respect, the second and you

need to GTFO.

I know more about law schools than you very small scope of comprehension will evr know ! YOU GET THE FUCK OUT ASS BITE !

Sandro777 wrote:I know more people from my UG at Florida Coastal than any other school.

Some people at your UG made terrible financial decision?

I want to know what kind of scholarships they were offered. I just don't want to believe that they are paying sticker or close to it because it will probably make me cry and wonder if they had the slightest clue what they were getting into?

cbq wrote:haven't picked a school yet but.. almost all of the faculty have decent background.. top 50 schools.. how does fcsl keep attracting those kinds of faculty if it's a sham?

same way Enron kept attracting the very best biz school ppl even when they didn't do any real bizness their last three year.. cause when you offer a high paying job you are going to get a large number of applicants. people like money.

Are you starting law school this fall? Are you already in law school and want to transfer? Do you want to know the inside tips to making Law Review, Moot Court, and/or Mock Trial? Want to know how to land a summer associateship at a big law firm and succeed when you get there?

The terrible legal job market across the U.S. makes top grades and membership in prestigious organizations an absolute must for any student wanting to begin a successful legal career. But how do top students prepare for class? What are top students doing that sets them apart from their peers? How do successful students land jobs?

Consider learning from someone who:- ranked in the top percentiles of a Tier 1 school - transferred out of a Tier 4 school after ranking in the top percentiles- has Law Review, Moot Court, and Mock Trial team experience - works at a large, prestigious law firm

We have three different programs to choose from:- The Grades (covers: reading schedule, class prep, outlining, studying, test-taking, transferring)- The Extracurriculars (covers: making Law Review, Moot Court, and/or Mock Trial, how to land board positions in these organizations, how to publish, public speaking) - The Jobs (covers: resume building, searching for jobs, the application process, interviewing, how to succeed as a summer associate or law clerk)

Each program is taught one-on-one, live, and in-person, with multiple handouts and examples given. If there is any particular area that you'd like to focus on, we can tailor a program to fit exactly what you're looking for. The charge is $125/hour, with a one-hour minimum.

In this legal job market, being a successful law student is not an option - LEARN FROM THE BEST.

I'm from Jax and have a few friends who went to coastal because it was their only option due to their hard partying ways, criminal records, etc. They all only got jobs because they went in with family or family friend legal connections at small firms.

I also taught an LSAT class in Jax and a lot of the UNF kids in it were saying they wanted to go to coastal. They were losers who didn't study and just didn't know what to do with themselves and got duped by the same marketing the coastal puts out year after year.

If coastal is your best option, you just should not be a lawyer, and there is nothing wrong with that. Seriously, just don't go to law school, don't take on that debt, don't waste 3 years of your life that you could spend finding something you'd be better at/enjoy and not have to get into huge debt to do.

I have seen people from FLorida Coastal get good jobs and I've seen T1 grads fall flat on their face. A legal education is what one puts into it. Also, Im a lot older than the traditional student. I'm not interested in BIG LAW nor are they in me.

texaslawyer wrote:I have seen people from FLorida Coastal get good jobs and I've seen T1 grads fall flat on their face. A legal education is what one puts into it. Also, Im a lot older than the traditional student. I'm not interested in BIG LAW nor are they in me.

In my opinion DUI defense work doesn't qualify as "good jobs." but what do I know . . .